Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

DRM and the Challenge of Serving Users

blog.mozilla.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 77 posts

Re: DRM and the Challenge of Serving Users

#31

Post by quasque »

cwyers wrote: post #11

The handwringing over this strikes me as extreme. Mozilla already ships with the ability for users to enable closed-source, proprietary DRM schemes to view web content -- the Flash and Silverlight plugins. Moving from the current regime of Flash/Silverlight to the EME is a move towards openness, not away from it -- the DRM scheme is still closed, but the content itself is more open and standard than before, as you're…

I agree, and think the sandboxing of the DRM plugin is a positive step towards more openness as well - the opaque algorithm implementing the DRM can apparently only touch the video streams it's being fed, and a unique identifier generated by the browser. Much better than the current situation of Flash having arbitrary network access and suchlike.

In concept, I think it's not too much different from server-side website code being mostly closed source. The only difference is that this component happens to be running on your computer.

Also there is prior form for this in similarly open systems, e.g. tainted modules in the Linux kernel, which seem to have turned out okay.

Re: DRM and the Challenge of Serving Users

#33

Post by rayiner »

shmerl wrote: post #30
rayiner wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're assuming that market mechanics for music and movies is the same.

I assume that DRM has no effect on piracy (it doesn't) and it always degrades usability (it does). Which means scraping it off always has no financial impact except for improving usability of the service and reducing costs of using DRM itself. Better usability + more user friendliness = more satisfied users + more new users = more profit.

I don't think it's a reasonable assumption to make that DRM has no effect on piracy. It won't stop sophisticated pirates, but I do think it stops people from releasing an easy-to-use app that lets your grandma store Netflix movies locally.

Re: DRM and the Challenge of Serving Users

#34

Post by rayiner »

shmerl wrote: post #28
rayiner wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That makes no sense. What "true reasons" do publishers have for DRM that aren't fundamentally financial?

I can think of several: 1. Monopolistic lock-in. DRM is more than often used to control the market. It happened with Apple in the past, and was one of the key reasons that music publishers realized that being DRM-free is actually better for them. This reason also includes DRM derivatives like DMCA-1201 and the like. It's all about control (over the markets, over users and etc.). 2. Covering one's incompetence. DRM is…

> 1. Monopolistic lock-in. DRM is more than often used to control the market.

How does this benefit the publisher? They already have a exclusive rights to whatever particular movie you're watching.

Re: DRM and the Challenge of Serving Users

#35

Post by rayiner »

tomp wrote: post #17
rayiner wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> majority accepting unethical practice like DRM Are you kidding? DRM is great. I love being able to just pay money to Netflix in return for content. DRM enables that nice, clear-cut transaction. What's the alternative? Judging by the rest of the web, it involves tracking your internet activity and throwing advertising in your face.

I also love being able to pay Apple money in exchange for DRM-free music . Also, DRM on video is approximately 0-efficient; pirates will still rip movies and upload them to torrent sites, freeloaders will still find free low-quality streaming movie sites, and the majority of non-technical users wouldn't be able to rip streaming video even without DRM. So: NO.

> the majority of non-technical users wouldn't be able to rip streaming video even without DRM.

How hard would it be to make an app that made this easy for non-technical users, without DRM?

Re: DRM and the Challenge of Serving Users

#36

Post by shmerl »

rayiner wrote: post #34
shmerl wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can think of several: 1. Monopolistic lock-in. DRM is more than often used to control the market. It happened with Apple in the past, and was one of the key reasons that music publishers realized that being DRM-free is actually better for them. This reason also includes DRM derivatives like DMCA-1201 and the like. It's all about control (over the markets, over users and etc.). 2. Covering one's incompetence. DRM is…

> 1. Monopolistic lock-in. DRM is more than often used to control the market. How does this benefit the publisher? They already have a exclusive rights to whatever particular movie you're watching.

It's not always the publisher. It can benefit some middle parties which implement DRM. Or for example mobile carriers which use DRM to prevent users from switching. Or whatever other monopolistic lock-in scenario.

When publishers realize that monopoly falls to some other hands, they quickly become sober and find common sense. When monopoly remains theirs, they pretend that DRM is needed for other reasons.

Re: DRM and the Challenge of Serving Users

#37

Post by shmerl »

rayiner wrote: post #33
shmerl wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I assume that DRM has no effect on piracy (it doesn't) and it always degrades usability (it does). Which means scraping it off always has no financial impact except for improving usability of the service and reducing costs of using DRM itself. Better usability + more user friendliness = more satisfied users + more new users = more profit.

I don't think it's a reasonable assumption to make that DRM has no effect on piracy. It won't stop sophisticated pirates, but I do think it stops people from releasing an easy-to-use app that lets your grandma store Netflix movies locally.

> I don't think it's a reasonable assumption to make that DRM has no effect on piracy.

It's not just reasonable, it's easily demonstrated in practice, when goods released with DRM are pirated almost right away (with DRM being scraped off). Sophisticated pirates are needed to break DRM. Unsophisticated ones get it from them without any hassle. Which means that DRM has no effect altogether except on legitimate users!

I.e. the vast majority of pirates never deal with any DRM, and experience of legitimate users is always degraded by it. It's pure common sense that removing DRM would always improve any service. And the fact that it's not happening is caused by other reasons (see above).

Re: DRM and the Challenge of Serving Users

#38

Post by davexunit »

Mozilla should have done the right thing and stood by their beliefs that DRM is harmful to the free web. Instead, they folded to the media corporations and implemented EME. I understand the tremendous pressure they must have been under, but it was the wrong decision. Mozilla is not serving the users by allowing Netflix, Amazon, and others to trample their freedom for the sake of watching TV shows.

Mozilla, please remove this anti-feature. Do the right thing.

Re: DRM and the Challenge of Serving Users

#39

Post by grincho »

chimeracoder wrote: post #22

> It will be easier for Firefox users to play DRM-enabled videos because they will not have to download Flash or Silverlight first. Firefox users will be able to choose whether to activate the new DRM system before it is accessed. Why not have this downloaded upon first use, the way that Flash and Silverlight have been? Also, isn't this what users on many Linux distros (e.g. Iceweasel on Debian) will have to do anywa…

Mozilla employee here, speaking for myself but pretty close to the info source.

That's actually what we're looking at doing: the sandbox would be in there, harmless, by default, but the actual crypto module (the "CDM") would download from Adobe upon first need. (And they have committed to support the platforms we support, Linux included.) The exact UI is still up in the air. I could imagine us using the opportunity to display a message to educate users as to what DRM is and whose phone number to call if they don't like it. ;-)

Re: DRM and the Challenge of Serving Users

#40

Post by throwaway2048 »

ozten wrote: post #12
gergles wrote: post #5

This is incredibly shameful. It's now only a matter of time before images, CSS, JavaScript, hell, even the text, are delivered through OS-specific, locked down CDMs. It will start with pissant sites nobody cares about (like the ones who are currently fighting AdBlock), but eventually a large site will demand it - most users will be using a device that handles this, and we will literally never have the Open Web ever a…

Mozilla is working very hard to limit the DRM to Video. This matches what has happened in practice over the years. Ads and entertainment have been packaged up in Flash with DRM. EME paves that cowpath.

Just like they worked very hard to prevent EME?
Post reply on HN